Union can represent OV cops, FOP may sue

Oct. 13, 2004 - A move has been made by the Oro Valley town
council to resolve the hotly debated meet and confer issue that has
divided the town's police department for nearly three years.

While the Police Officers Association, the group that brought
forth the original ordinance that would grant the town's public
safety workers the right to meet and confer, is happy about the
move, the Oro Valley Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 53 remains
firmly against it, threatening to sue the town for its right to
represent its members at the bargaining table.

The ordinance has been dubbed the "meet and confer" ordinance
because language in the document gives officers the ability to
negotiate wages and benefits as a collective body. But the
ordinance does more than grant the right to negotiate, it also sets
up the system wherein a group representing all the safety workers
is chosen, through an election, and then negotiates on behalf of
everyone. It also sets up a system for settling grievances through
the chosen representative.

The ordinance was brought before the council at the request of
Councilmember Terry Parish during the Oct. 8 council meeting and
passed 5 to 2 with Mayor Paul Loomis and Councilmember Kenneth "KC"
Carter voting against it.

Acting Town Attorney Tobin Sidles declined to comment on what is
specifically different in this new ordinance from one that was
proposed by the OVPOA last year, but not considered. The group sued
the town for denying it the right to seek voter approval of that
ordinance.

At the time, then town attorney Mark Langlitz said the town took
issue with the "language of exclusivity" contained in the
ordinance. "If 55 percent (of Oro Valley police) want to join
AZCOPS and want to exclusively represent all police, we can't do
that," Langlitz said at the time to the Northwest EXPLORER. "It
would mean silencing the minority."

Although he helped to rewrite the ordinance, Langlitz declined
to comment on the issue when reached by phone Oct. 7, saying he was
no longer with the town, having taken a position with the county
attorney's office.

The new ordinance does include a change in language from using
"official and exclusive" when describing a group elected to
represent public safety workers, to using the "official
representative."

Loomis, in voting to deny the ordinance, said he still felt
language of exclusivity existed in the document. Carter said he
felt that FOP President Herb Williams and Police Chief Danny Sharp
should have been present to answer any questions and have input on
the ordinance and asked that the item be continued.

During the discussion, Councilmember Barry Gillaspie said the
town did enact "a quasi meet and confer ordinance" for a few years
and both groups were able to come to the table this year to work
out their terms.

"The end game is to bring some harmony to the public safety
department," he said, adding that the ordinance will bring due
process, choice and a bargaining committee to the employees.

"I don't believe the town is obligated to negotiate with
multiple parties anymore. We're growing, we're getting bigger," he
said.

Although Vice Mayor Paula Abbott was behind the deal worked out
last year for two members from each group to be represented in
negotiations, she supported the ordinance this year, saying it
"follows the democratic process I believe in."

The ordinance was opposed by several members of the FOP because
they said it cuts off their ability to negotiate for themselves and
forces them to surrender that right to whatever organization has a
majority membership. While many Oro Valley officers belong to both
the OVPOA and FOP, both groups said the majority vote will likely
favor the OVPOA. Nearly a dozen OVPOSA members attended the meeting
to express support for the ordinance.

Fueling the interest in the Police Officers Association was the
case of Sgt. James Bloomfield, a 14-year veteran fired after an
internal affairs investigation determined he had lied to superiors
about an affair with another officer's girlfriend.

Bloomfield appealed his firing to a grievance board which had
the power to reinstate him, reinstate him with a lesser discipline
or uphold the firing. The Oro Valley Employee Grievance Board
upheld the firing on a 3-2 vote.

The way the department's command staff handled Bloomfield's
investigation was a concern to officers and caused some to join the
OVPOA.

Officer Dan Krueger, president of the OVPOA, an affiliate of the
Arizona Conference of Police and Sheriffs, (AZCOPS), has been with
the Oro Valley police department for 10 years and said the officers
have been trying for as long as he can remember to get such an
ordinance in writing and adopted by the town.

Krueger said this ordinance does not grant exclusivity, but
"establishes a process where all members can vote." Officers, he
said, can still choose which group represents them. He said, to
him, getting the ordinance passed was not about choosing one
organization over the other, but about having someone who can
represent the public safety workers on issues such as wages and
grievances.

"We don't want to freeze out anyone," he said in an interview
following the meeting. "I think some people feel like they are
losing a voice. I have faith that whoever is chosen to represent us
will negotiate in the best interest of everyone."

Krueger said the OVPOA members did compromise on what the
association wanted and what appears in the final ordinance. For
example, he said in their original proposal it would require at
least 30 percent of the town's public safety workers to request an
election to chose which group represents them in any given year. In
the new ordinance anyone can call an election, even if it is just
one person.

Williams could not be present at the council meeting, but sent a
letter to the mayor and several other town officials that was read
at the meeting. In the letter, he objected to the ordinance,
writing that "any proposal passed by the council granting
exclusivity and limiting our ability to represent FOP members
during negotiations will result in litigation against the town." In
a subsequent interview, he said he does plan to meet with the
Attorney General regarding the legality of the ordinance and is
considering filing suit. He said he feels such action is
"unfortunate" because it will cost the town, and in turn the
taxpayers' money on lawyers and legal fees.

He said he believes that the process used last year where
members from both organizations negotiated together was "fair and
benefitted all police department employees."

He said Parish bringing the item to the agenda shows "that he is
biased in favor of the Oro Valley Police Officers Association."
Williams also said he thought the move was a political payback to
the OVPOA, which campaigned in favor of four councilmembers
including Parish. He pointed to a letter published shortly after
the council election in May by AZCOPS attorney Martin Bihn in which
Bihn celebrated the election of the council in writing, "This is a
huge step in Oro Valley because these candidates committed to
immediate enactment of meet and confer."

In the same letter he wrote: "Realizing that we could be
litigating against the town for years, AZCOPS and the Oro Valley
POA decided to replace the city council in the next election. This
is a fundamental AZCOPS principle, - we will first try to work with
you, if you refuse, we will take you out."

Williams said he felt because the FOP chose to stay out of the
election and politics altogether and situate itself as a
service-based organization, that it now is paying the price.

"We're typically not involved in politics. Now its coming back
to haunt us," he said.

Another officer, Mike Schuh, said the ordinance was
contradictory, allowing officers a choice of membership in one
section and then stating later only one organization will be chosen
to represent the officers in another section. He said because a
majority of the officers have currently chosen OVPOA to represent
them, "as an FOP member, I will never have the opportunity to be
represented." He said the ordinance will "drive a wedge through the
officers."

Schuh also asked that Parish abstain from voting on the
ordinance due to a perception of some as having a conflict of
interest, being a police officer and former president of an AZCOPS
organization in Pima County.

At the meeting, Parish denied being biased on the issue, saying
he was not a union member. Parish resigned his membership in the
Pima County Deputy Sheriff's Association Sept. 27.

In an interview Oct. 7, he said he was "disappointed" that was
the perception because he made efforts to meet with everyone to
develop a compromise on this issue. He said the end product is the
result of give and take between the FOP, OVPOA and the Oro Valley
Police Department and town management.

He said he thought most of the meetings between the groups were
positive and that he left the last meeting feeling that, while
neither the FOP or OVPOA was completely happy, they had reached an
agreement. He said he was "a little surprised" at the feelings of
opposition expressed at the council meeting.

Williams said while some of the meetings did seem to go well, he
did not believe his concerns were heard and was not able to see the
final ordinance before it was approved by the council.

Parish said he brought the item forward because he thinks such
an ordinance is "essential to have open lines of
communication."

He said in the past, there was a perception that the town could
pit the two existing police organizations against each other in
order to get what it wanted, which he said was not always to the
benefit of the workers.

This ordinance, Parish said, protects all of the public safety
workers in the town.

While some members may think this ordinance will squeeze the FOP
out of Oro Valley, Parish said the ordinance will actually "force
them to work together."

He said the issue of meet and confer has been very divisive, not
only in Oro Valley, but across the state, and the intent of the
ordinance is not to change the ability of a public safety officer
to belong to one organization or the other, or no organization if
that is their choice.

At the same time, Parish said, in a way, the ordinance is
exclusive in nature.

"It allows the public safety employees to put forth a united
front when negotiating with the town."

He said he was pleased to hear members of OVPOA say at the
meeting that if they were elected to represent the workers they
would like to include members of the FOP in that process.